Jay A

Lives in United States NY, United States
Works as a Photographer
Joined on May 17, 2004

Comments

Total: 56, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Jay A: I'm sorry but some of the responses here seem to be coming from misogynistic men who have no clue nor do not care about a woman's right to a job without her having to deal with unwanted sexual advances. While I am sure there are many whores who give in to the advances of the predators especially in Hollywood, no one should have to be subject to this kind of thing in order to secure a decent and respectful job.

"Then say firmly NO and complain to authorities at spot. Not years after."
This COMPLETELY misses the point! We happen to be living in a society where this behavior is tolerated and repeated over and over in certain industries.
Just say firmly NO and complain to authorities does nothing to stop this tolerance. Weinstein had a contract which gave him a slap on the wrist for what he did. It should have been a contract which threw him in jail. Sexual harassment is in many states (especially the one in which he worked) illegal.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 16:34 UTC

I'm sorry but some of the responses here seem to be coming from misogynistic men who have no clue nor do not care about a woman's right to a job without her having to deal with unwanted sexual advances. While I am sure there are many whores who give in to the advances of the predators especially in Hollywood, no one should have to be subject to this kind of thing in order to secure a decent and respectful job.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 15:26 UTC as 56th comment | 17 replies
On article Canon patents a huge, hinged and reversible DSLR LCD (179 comments in total)

So seriously, how is this better than just attaching any one of a number of different sized LCD panels of your choice to the hot shoe?

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2017 at 22:24 UTC as 34th comment | 1 reply
On article Nikon's official D850 lens recommendation list (310 comments in total)

So how many are returning their 28 F1.4E and going with the 1.8G instead because Nikon changed their list to include the 1.8?
Or is this just a typo?

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2017 at 15:33 UTC as 50th comment

If this would only encourage Nikon to resurrect the F2, my life would be complete!

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2017 at 15:42 UTC as 53rd comment | 1 reply

Nice idea but it honestly makes me wonder why, if Nikon feels that people have a need to copy slides or negatives, have they not supported their own film scanners for years.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2017 at 20:25 UTC as 47th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Jay A: I think these equivalence discussions/explanations have done more harm for most people than any one single aspect of digital photography. It has led to many people believing that the same lens, shutter speed, F-stop, ISO combination will give different exposure (lighter or darker image) results if used with different sized sensors. This is just not so. Using a 50mm lens at 1/125, F5.6 and an ISO of 100 will give the SAME exposure (lighter or darker resulting image) whether a full frame sensor, an APS-C sensor, or a medium format sensor is used. The only difference will be that the field of view changes, the noise level changes and the depth-of-field changes.

Chris2201, I did read it, no reason to be insulting to me. I am merely stating that after reading countless articles about "equivalence" I have seen more people confused with misconceptions than people who actually learned anything.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2017 at 19:47 UTC

I think these equivalence discussions/explanations have done more harm for most people than any one single aspect of digital photography. It has led to many people believing that the same lens, shutter speed, F-stop, ISO combination will give different exposure (lighter or darker image) results if used with different sized sensors. This is just not so. Using a 50mm lens at 1/125, F5.6 and an ISO of 100 will give the SAME exposure (lighter or darker resulting image) whether a full frame sensor, an APS-C sensor, or a medium format sensor is used. The only difference will be that the field of view changes, the noise level changes and the depth-of-field changes.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2017 at 15:24 UTC as 89th comment | 10 replies

Cartier-Bresson once said, "you have to milk a lot of cows to get a little bit of cheese." Yes he shot an awful lot to get his "decisive moments." So what? He GOT his decisive moments and in my opinion (and that of many others), produced some of the greatest photos of all time. If you do not understand his photos, so be it. Maybe they are not for you. Was he aware of the compositional elements that so often came together in his shots? I doubt he thought very much about them, but I would bet that he was at least sub consciously aware of things going on.
"Good photography" can mean 100 different things to 100 different people. To many camera club fans, it means following rules set forward by other camera club members. To camera forum members a good photo may be one that is technically proficient made by an expensive camera. To an artist, it may involve a communication with things such as "form" and "content."
Not all is right for everyone. To each his own as they say.

Link | Posted on Aug 20, 2017 at 00:26 UTC as 72nd comment | 2 replies

Obviously laws such as these are not instituted in order to stop criminals who will ignore them anyway but rather for otherwise responsible people who just get careless and/or feel that it is their right to do whatever they want with their expensive toys. Plus I suppose it DOES give law enforcement the ability to prosecute the criminals as well if they are caught.
This has nothing to do with nitwits, liberals, conservatives or otherwise. It is just pure common sense to educate those making purchases of items that have the capability of doing harm on a pretty large scale as drones do.
We don't say "well murderers will commit murder whether there are laws against it or not, so we might as well not have laws against murder." That's the logic of those who speak out against laws such as ones that are desperately needed for toys such as drones.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2017 at 21:30 UTC as 26th comment | 10 replies
On article DPReview on TWiT: Is the Sony a9 worth $4500? (223 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jay A: I spent a good portion of my pro career shooting sports when manual focus and 5fps was about as good as it got and frankly I can't see shooing any sport with auto focus let alone needing anything even remotely close to 20fps. I know times have changed,... but really? Is this really necessary? And for $4500?

Well back then a Nikon F3 with MD4 could be purchased for about $700 or so. Yes, it's all relative but I don't think camera prices have gone up proportionally to inflation. Yes you get a whole lot more in a camera these days, but I constantly question just how much of it is really needed. If they would just make an FM2 digital with no LCD, and no AF...just a good ol manual focusing screen that one can actually use to manually focus, a camera that just happened to record to a memory card instead of a roll of film, and sell it for about a grand or so, I would grab it in a heartbeat.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2017 at 15:34 UTC
On article DPReview on TWiT: Is the Sony a9 worth $4500? (223 comments in total)

I spent a good portion of my pro career shooting sports when manual focus and 5fps was about as good as it got and frankly I can't see shooing any sport with auto focus let alone needing anything even remotely close to 20fps. I know times have changed,... but really? Is this really necessary? And for $4500?

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2017 at 14:50 UTC as 45th comment | 6 replies

If anyone here should possibly need something like this (I wish I knew why) don't worry. 1tb version of them will probably be available for about 60 bucks in a couple of years.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2017 at 16:01 UTC as 9th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Jay A: This may be a naïve question, but if some border agent in some third world country has stopped you and is wanting to see your photos due to some suspicions he may have, isn't he going to demand that you turn off the encryption so that he may gain access to those photos? If you refuse, aren't you putting yourself in as much dangers as if you might by letting him view the photos, maybe even more? Also, if you have photographed someone or something that might be illegal in that particular country, haven't you yourself put yourself in such danger? Seems to me that what is being asked here is like asking for someone to come up with some kind of protective case that would hide illegal drugs being smuggled out of a country.
I'd think that by far most camera thefts are done by those interested in reselling your $5000 camera on a street corner for 50 bucks. I doubt someone doing that would give a crap about what's on your memory cards.

By the way, I think you are assuming that authorities everywhere act and react the way they do in the free world...
"If the photog doesn't have the "password" to decrypt their photos, then there's no reason to torture them, is there?"
Yeah? Tell that to an isis operative who is demanding to see your photos.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2016 at 17:08 UTC
In reply to:

Jay A: This may be a naïve question, but if some border agent in some third world country has stopped you and is wanting to see your photos due to some suspicions he may have, isn't he going to demand that you turn off the encryption so that he may gain access to those photos? If you refuse, aren't you putting yourself in as much dangers as if you might by letting him view the photos, maybe even more? Also, if you have photographed someone or something that might be illegal in that particular country, haven't you yourself put yourself in such danger? Seems to me that what is being asked here is like asking for someone to come up with some kind of protective case that would hide illegal drugs being smuggled out of a country.
I'd think that by far most camera thefts are done by those interested in reselling your $5000 camera on a street corner for 50 bucks. I doubt someone doing that would give a crap about what's on your memory cards.

No, I understand you perfectly. What I am implying is that if they suspect you, they may want to hold you and/or your memory cards until you ARE able to show them what's on the cards.
Imagine photographing in an area where a major political event such as an assassination takes place. You are seen with a camera by authorities. You may or may not even have been photographing what happened. The authorities approach you and demand to see the photos. You're going to tell them you can't show them your photos? You're saying the photographer has no choice. I'd AT LEAST like to have the choice. Wouldn't you?

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2016 at 17:04 UTC
In reply to:

Jay A: This may be a naïve question, but if some border agent in some third world country has stopped you and is wanting to see your photos due to some suspicions he may have, isn't he going to demand that you turn off the encryption so that he may gain access to those photos? If you refuse, aren't you putting yourself in as much dangers as if you might by letting him view the photos, maybe even more? Also, if you have photographed someone or something that might be illegal in that particular country, haven't you yourself put yourself in such danger? Seems to me that what is being asked here is like asking for someone to come up with some kind of protective case that would hide illegal drugs being smuggled out of a country.
I'd think that by far most camera thefts are done by those interested in reselling your $5000 camera on a street corner for 50 bucks. I doubt someone doing that would give a crap about what's on your memory cards.

By "turn off encryption" I meant that he may demand to see the photos before letting you go with the cameras and memory cards.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2016 at 16:28 UTC

This may be a naïve question, but if some border agent in some third world country has stopped you and is wanting to see your photos due to some suspicions he may have, isn't he going to demand that you turn off the encryption so that he may gain access to those photos? If you refuse, aren't you putting yourself in as much dangers as if you might by letting him view the photos, maybe even more? Also, if you have photographed someone or something that might be illegal in that particular country, haven't you yourself put yourself in such danger? Seems to me that what is being asked here is like asking for someone to come up with some kind of protective case that would hide illegal drugs being smuggled out of a country.
I'd think that by far most camera thefts are done by those interested in reselling your $5000 camera on a street corner for 50 bucks. I doubt someone doing that would give a crap about what's on your memory cards.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2016 at 16:06 UTC as 21st comment | 7 replies
On article Nikon reportedly eliminating 1000 jobs in Japan (518 comments in total)

Very predictable. Listen, Nikon, as long as you keep ignoring the plea to produce a viable prosumer and/or professional mirrorless camera, your numbers will continue to decline.
And for that matter....KeyMission? Really? Have you seen the problems that GoPro has had in the past year?

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2016 at 00:43 UTC as 171st comment | 2 replies
On article DPReview Asks: What was your first camera? (766 comments in total)

Kodak Brownie Super 27 from 1961

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2016 at 14:39 UTC as 546th comment | 1 reply

I think this is actually a funny product. I would assume that the idea behind it is to be discreet. However it looks like it would stand out like a sore thumb, and it makes a shutter sound? Why?
I also wonder...does it take a picture every time you blink?
Funny

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2016 at 21:30 UTC as 34th comment
Total: 56, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »